SIM 499 Evidence-Based Project-Part 3 Critical Appraisal Of Research

SIM 499 Evidence-Based Project-Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research

Evidence-Based Project-Part 3: Critical Appraisal of Research

Article 1

The first article chosen for an appraisal is Evidence-based practice, step by step: a critical appraisal of the evidence: Part III by Ellen Fineout-Overholt, Betnadette Mazurek Melnyk, Susan Stilwell, and Kathleen Williamson. The article was published in 2010 and is the 7th in a series of on Evidence-based practices by the Arizona State University College of Nursing and Health

Design/Method

The researchers have a well-articulated plan of how to carry out an appraisal of research. Using the hypothetical nurse scenario, a synthesis table is created from which data is extracted to compare the similarities and differences from the study. From the synthesis table, the researchers the team of researchers can deduce data with higher-level evidence and those with lower-level evidence.

Sample/Setting

The sample used by the researchers is sufficient. The research used between 218 and 662 hospital beds across the studies. In my opinion, this sample is adequate for the research because it spanned across several types of hospitals- 4 teaching, 4 community, 4 no mention, 2 acute care hospitals, and 1 public hospital. These are more than adequate to get desired results.

Findings

Using the hypothetical nurse case scenario, to help the team better discuss the evidence, Carlos suggests that they refer to all projects or studies as the body of evidence. They don’t want to get confused by calling them all studies, as they aren’t, but at the same time continually referring to studies and projects is cumbersome (Fineout-Overholt, 2010). He goes on to say that, as part of the synthesis process, it’s important for the group to determine the overall impact of the intervention across the body of evidence.

Article 2

Introduction

The second article for an appraisal is Evidence-based practice, step by step: a critical appraisal of the evidence: Part I by Ellen Fineout-Overholt, Betnadette Mazurek Melnyk, Susan Stilwell, and Kathleen Williamson. The article was published in 2010 and is the 5th in a series of on Evidence-based practice articles by the Arizona State University College of Nursing and Health. In this article, the hypothetical staff nurse, and Carlos A., her hospital’s expert EBP mentor, learned how to search for the evidence to answer their clinical question presented in PICOT format.

Design/Method

In this article, the authors use the hypothetical staff nurse to discuss and answer the question “In hospitalized adults (P), how does a rapid response team (I) compared with no rapid response team (C) affect the number of cardiac arrests (O) and unplanned admissions to the ICU (O) during a three-month period (T) Fineout-Overholt, et al., 2010). Through the help of the hospital librarian, Carlos and fellow staff nurses searched three reputable databases- PubMed, the Cumulative Index of Nursing, and Allied Health Literature to acquire information about their PICOT question. A total of 79 studies were chosen by Carlos and her team-18 from PubMed, 6 from CINAHL, and 1 from the Cochrane Database of the systematic review. SIM 499 Evidence-Based Project-Part 3 Critical Appraisal of Research

Findings

The team found that to determine the appropriate level of evidence, it was necessary to divide the studies into groups based on their study design. The team also included some descriptive studies that did not actively answer the PICOT question but contained critical information on the same. For example, from the studies chosen, there are many expert opinions and guidelines.

Article 3

Introduction

I have chosen the article Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice by Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2018). (4th ed. This book is divided into four parts each addressing different components of evidence-based practice. Part 1-which is also the introductory part of the book talks about the technique of developing and searching Clinical Questions (Melnyk, & Fineout-Overholt, 2011). This article is the first in a series of seven articles about evidence-based practice. In part one, the authors talk about some practices that are used by nurses yet they are outdated, irrelevant, and do not support evidence-based practice.

Methods

This article uses a series of questions that can spark the spirit of inquiry in nurses to promote evidence-based practice. Once the spirit of inquiry is sparked, nurses must then embrace EBP skills and knowledge and adopt an organizational culture that supports EBP.

Findings

This study was not an empirical study but an oral evaluation of evidence-based practices.

Article 4

Introduction

Evidence-based practice, step by step: a critical appraisal of the evidence: part II: digging deeper–examining the “keeper” studies was written by Ellen Fineout-Overholt, Betnadette Mazurek Melnyk, Susan Stilwell, and Kathleen Williamson. The article was published in 2010 and is the 6th in a series on Evidence-based practice by the Arizona State University College of Nursing and Health.

In this article, Ellen Fineout-Overholt and fellow researchers look at some of the evidence-based problem-solving approaches that lead to the provision of quality healthcare. Fineout-Overholt and her colleagues look at how quality health care can be provided in the context of a caring and supportive organizational environment. In this article, Fineout-Overholt and her fellow team of researchers clearly introduce the objective of their study-in this case evidence-based practice.

Design

In this article, the authors use a hypothetical nursing scenario. Rebecca R., the hypothetical staff nurse, Carlos A., her hospital’s expert EBP mentor, and Chen M., Rebecca’s nurse colleague, collected the evidence to answer their clinical question: “In hospitalized adults (P), how does a rapid response team (I) compared with no rapid response team (C) affect the number of cardiac arrests (O) and unplanned admissions to the ICU (O) during a three-month period (T)

Findings

Using the hypothetical case scenario, the researchers found that the validity of research can be achieved through scientific methods. The researchers concluded that for a study to be valid, it must be conducted in a way that is devoid of biases or confounding variables.